[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Logo trademark license vs. copyright license

Francesco Poli wrote:
> As I understand it, the current proposed wording is:
> | The work [X] is a trademark, held by [Y], representing [Z].

The sign [X] (hereafter "the Mark") is a trademark, rights to which
are held by [Y], representing [Z] if applicable (hereafter "the
Mark Holder").

The word 'work' sounds copyright-ish and may seem strange when
you have a single word like 'debian' here.

> | If the Mark qualifies as an original work of authorship under
> | copyright law, then 

the Mark Holder hereby also grants you a copyright license under

> | the copyright license below,
> | but that is not a trademark license and should not be construed as
> | one.
> |
> | [Expat license follows]

Is it your intention to include the Expat license verbatim in
this license? If so, people still have to carry around both
the copyright and the trademark license. 

Do you want to put in a "--- CUT HERE 8< ---" somewhere between
the copyright and the trademark part? Or do you want to make it
two files, Copyright.license and Trademark.license? 


Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/

Reply to: